Seaboard Coast Line R. Co. v. Sheffield, 47588

• Decision Date: 16 November 1972
• Docket Number: No. 47588,No. 2,47588,2
• Citation: 127 Ga.App. 580,194 S.E.2d 484
• Parties: SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY v. Ronald L. SHEFFIELD
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Page 484

194 S.E.2d 484

127 Ga.App. 580

SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY v. Ronald L. SHEFFIELD.

No. 47588.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division No. 2.

Nov. 16, 1972.

Nightingale, Liles & Dennard, B. N. Nightingale, Brunswick, for appellant.

Taylor, Bishop & Lee, James A. Bishop, Brunswick, for appellee.

Syllabus Opinion by the Court

HALL, Presiding Judge.

In an action for personal injury and property damage, the defendant railroad appeals from the judgment and from the denial of its motion for judgment n.o.v.

The facts of this care are virtually undisputed. Plaintiff drove his automobile into the 30th car of a freight train as it was moving through a grade crossing at about midnight. The road at this point is perfectly straight and level with nothing to obstruct a clear view of the line. There are standard railroad cross-buck signs on the right hand approaches. Plaintiff testified: that he had traveled this road on the average of twice a day for the preceding three years; the night was cloudy and very dark; it had started 'sprinkling' shortly before but it was not raining hard; there was no fog or other atmospheric condition obstructing his vision; he was traveling at about 20-25 miles per hour; there was no traffic coming from the opposite direction but he was using his dim headlights because of 'laziness'; he heard absolutely nothing; but that he suddenly saw a big black object in the middle of the road, applied his brakes, slewed sidewise and hit the train. An accident investigator testifying for plaintiff stated that the road was wet and had some sand on it; that there were skid marks on the road for 48 feet before the point of impact; that there was a mercury-vapor light burning at a nearby store; and that while the night was indeed very dark, there was enough illumination at the scene for him to write up his report without a flashlight.

All the railroad employees on the train agreed that they had approached the crossing with lights on, horn blowing and bell ringing; that their speed at the crossing was 10-15 miles per hour; and that while they had flares on board, none were set out there that night. Plaintiff's critical allegations of negligence against the railroad were that it failed to warn that a dangerous crossing was blocked by a train either by providing automatic flashing signal lights or by requiring the use of flares when the train was so dark it blended into the darkness of the night.

It has long since been the rule in Georgia that there must be unusual or special circumstances at a crossing before a railroad has the duty to warn of something as starkly obvious as a train; or, conversely, before a driver is excused for not seeing something plainly visible within the range of the statutory headlights requirement. In the absence of such special circumstances, the duty to warn does not arise and the sole proximate cause of the collision is the negligence of the driver. Burnett v. Louisville & Nashville R. Co., 58 Ga.App. 64, 197 S.E. 663; Pollard v. Clifton, 62 Ga.App. 573, 9 S.E.2d 782; Evans v. Georgia Northern R. Co., 78 Ga.App. 709, 52 S.E.2d 28; Georgia Northern R. Co. v. Stains, 88 Ga.App. 6, 75 S.E.2d 833; Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Marshall, ...